Poll: I want to change the Gamer reputation.

[xdiesp]

> Gamergate has become toxic and unsavageable.

You can judge a person's worth by the way he treats his own opponents!

There can no discussion with someone so much in love with himself, to label everyone outside his group a retrograde mysoginerd monster in his own home.

 

[grassgremlin]

My question is how do you propose to get the games media to actually update their ethics policy and stick to it? My goal in gamergate has always been to have all of these website implement a standard journalistic ethics policy like this one http://www.nytco.com/who-we-are/culture/standards-and-ethics/

How do you plan on getting these website to update and more importantly follow such a set of guidelines? We don't know the contracts the AAA industry make them sign, we don't know what kind of goodies they send along with their review copies, we don't know what kind of benefits they are getting when publishers fly out the journalists and wine and dine them. So how do you plan on getting rid of these practices? And what is your plan when they inevitably say "NO". Do you plan on doing a letter writing campaign similar to ODN, or a silent boycott? I guess my question is what do you do when negotiations fall apart? And how do you plan on finding out when they are breaking the ethics policies if they are all willing to keep quiet about their own doings?

I'm not asking this to be antagonistic, I really am curious on what your plan is.

We define exactly what these things are. I think the problem as been that Game Reviewers don't know what the audience means by Objectivity. That's the main issue and has been miscommunication. We need to define objective review. Show them that it's now what they think it means.

In fact, stop calling it objective review.

Edit:
Oh! What I plan to do when things fall apart?
If I site really does not listen then the best course of action is boycott. Make it clear that not fixing your practices will cause your audience to revolt and leave you.

 

[grassgremlin]

> Gamergate has become toxic and unsavageable.

You can judge a person's worth by the way he treats his own opponents!

There can no discussion with someone so much in love with himself, to label everyone outside his group a retrograde mysoginerd monster in his own home.

Don't worry. I'm updating it to Gamergate can be salvaged. I've done my research so I'm changing the goal.

 

[Requia]

2) Rally against social justice and feminism. This is about video games not political issues!

If you really want to do this, you need to be aware of what you're in for. They are going to try and pull the same trick with this they pulled with GG, and by labeling it a neoreactionary, neofascist, antifeminist, conservative movement and whatever other slur and pseudoslur they can come up with. This will drive people exactly like that towards you. Some of the people you start with are going to *be* those people. And that's unavoidable, you can't exclude them and still succeed. But you are going to have a fight on your hands to keep things on the topic of the gaming press instead of gaming feminism. This is made all the worse because much of the shitty press behavior has been essentially fake social justice. GG turned into a warzone this month, with GGers being harassed out by their own side for not being in line with turning this into an antifeminist deal.

I am, frankly, burned out right now between fighting this fight in GG and dealing with my own personal antiGG stalker (they won't show in this thread, I fled here cause it's a different username). When I'm ready to start back up I'll see if you've avoided it happening again or not.

 

[Verlander]

Define corruption in the gaming industry first, and then there's a conversation to be had. A writer discussing their opinions, or judging something from a cultural perspective isn't corruption.

 

[Montezuma's Lawyer]

You might as well be asking Islam to redefine itself.

 

[grassgremlin]

2) Rally against social justice and feminism. This is about video games not political issues!

If you really want to do this, you need to be aware of what you're in for. They are going to try and pull the same trick with this they pulled with GG, and by labeling it a neoreactionary, neofascist, antifeminist, conservative movement and whatever other slur and pseudoslur they can come up with. This will drive people exactly like that towards you. Some of the people you start with are going to *be* those people. And that's unavoidable, you can't exclude them and still succeed. But you are going to have a fight on your hands to keep things on the topic of the gaming press instead of gaming feminism. This is made all the worse because much of the shitty press behavior has been essentially fake social justice. GG turned into a warzone this month, with GGers being harassed out by their own side for not being in line with turning this into an antifeminist deal.

I am, frankly, burned out right now between fighting this fight in GG and dealing with my own personal antiGG stalker (they won't show in this thread, I fled here cause it's a different username). When I'm ready to start back up I'll see if you've avoided it happening again or not.

I've settled on this being a independent entity.
They can't attack something it isn't fighting anyone.
The goal will be basically . . . push this agenda.

I guess I can say this will be the agenda.
So with Gamergate, I'm using what i agree to be good points to adopt into my own ideas.
Influence, but not associating directly.

 

[grassgremlin]

Define corruption in the gaming industry first, and then there's a conversation to be had. A writer discussing their opinions, or judging something from a cultural perspective isn't corruption.

Right, I agree with you. That's actually the main goal in all this.
Defining what people mean, seeing the ACTUAL wrongs and not using things taken out of context.

 

[Servetus]

6) Allow discussion for counter-arguments to alternate critiques that might not be focused on gaming WITHOUT attacking the critic's character. Make it clear that people have the right to disagree. Abolish what could be seen as a echo chamber.

2) Rally against social justice and feminism. This is about video games not political issues!

These don't conflict directly, but there is a conflict here. Some Social Justice ideological positions are being used to critique games; you can't allow for counter arguments without discussing them. This is one of the MAJOR problems, from what I can see, that GG has with the current media narrative. It's not that feminist/SJ thought has become a piece of the critical analysis; it's that criticizing said thoughts or theories gets you branded irrational or, worse, sexist. We, as gamers, don't want a new church that can excommunicate us from social circles simply because the local bishop decreed our questions to be subversive.

This is a personal point for me. My major was in Economics, the specific version I specialized in was Capitalist theory. I will tell you this; one of the darkest times for Capitalism in this country was when Capitalists could brand those who questioned their theorems as Communist subversives. It allowed various Capitalist thought to flourish without major criticisms of the effects and years later it was shown that some of those critiques had real value. Now, of course, not everything is to blame for this; but I'm pointing this out to illustrate that NO ideology, from Capitalism, to Christianity/Islam, to Feminism; should be beyond reproach.

Civil discourse provides us with rational criticism, and it allows us to keep ideological positions from becoming extreme. And no human, none, should go without that. Every ideology, due to their very nature, has the propensity of radicalizing; of allowing their dogma to build on itself as evidence due to simply not being questioned. This is wrong.

But let me clear, I'm not saying Feminism is "wrong"...I think feminist critiques in gaming are fine. Heck, I may disagree with Anita, for example, but I will vigorously defend her right to open make those critiques because I find discourse to be a pillar of civil society. But this requires that I ALSO allow for counter movements and critiques without viewing them as inherently evil, or vile. And the fact that the media has tried to illustrate ANY criticism of Feminism AS that? Is part of the problem.

(Also, it should be noted that post-modernism, which many of these social justice ideologues fall under, finds *everything* to be a political issue. Hence why they advocate a need for these kinds of critiques in games.)

 

[Silvanus]

The problem with Gamergate is not its values. Its against the sickening wave of political correctness, which is starting to affect the journalistic sector of gaming which, despite its incredibly awfulness, has power, which is all entering through proxy of the hypocritical third wave of feminism movement, which was started off by Zoe Quinn escaping controversy she absolutely deserved.

None of this is actually directly related to journalism ethics.

 

[grassgremlin]

6) Allow discussion for counter-arguments to alternate critiques that might not be focused on gaming WITHOUT attacking the critic's character. Make it clear that people have the right to disagree. Abolish what could be seen as a echo chamber.

2) Rally against social justice and feminism. This is about video games not political issues!

These don't conflict directly, but there is a conflict here. Some Social Justice ideological positions are being used to critique games; you can't allow for counter arguments without discussing them. This is one of the MAJOR problems, from what I can see, that GG has with the current media narrative. It's not that feminist/SJ thought has become a piece of the critical analysis; it's that criticizing said thoughts or theories gets you branded irrational or, worse, sexist. We, as gamers, don't want a new church that can excommunicate us from social circles simply because the local bishop decreed our questions to be subversive.

This is a personal point for me. My major was in Economics, the specific version I specialized in was Capitalist theory. I will tell you this; one of the darkest times for Capitalism in this country was when Capitalists could brand those who questioned their theorems as Communist subversives. It allowed various Capitalist thought to flourish without major criticisms of the effects and years later it was shown that some of those critiques had real value. Now, of course, not everything is to blame for this; but I'm pointing this out to illustrate that NO ideology, from Capitalism, to Christianity/Islam, to Feminism; should be beyond reproach.

Civil discourse provides us with rational criticism, and it allows us to keep ideological positions from becoming extreme. And no human, none, should go without that. Every ideology, due to their very nature, has the propensity of radicalizing; of allowing their dogma to build on itself as evidence due to simply not being questioned. This is wrong.

But let me clear, I'm not saying Feminism is "wrong"...I think feminist critiques in gaming are fine. Heck, I may disagree with Anita, for example, but I will vigorously defend her right to open make those critiques because I find discourse to be a pillar of civil society. But this requires that I ALSO allow for counter movements and critiques without viewing them as inherently evil, or vile. And the fact that the media has tried to illustrate ANY criticism of Feminism AS that? Is part of the problem.

To explain, what I mean to say is this.
This is not going to be a rally call against SJWs or Feminist.
I'm not saying you are not allow to criticize certain kinds of Feminism or Social Justice.
The entire idea is making sure it's not seen as hostile.

Now, I understand some may overreact when they do see a critique of some nature about these issues.
I honestly expect it may happen, but the idea is to make sure we are not doing things like overgeneralizing all feminists.

Basically, critique the writing, not the ideologue to directly. Feminism has many factions so, someone of a particular faction may feel defensive if the group is overgeneralized.

And yeah, I know. People look for a fight. I know this will not be perfect, but the less damage this takes the better.
Basically, don't be a Thunderfoot.

 

[Pirate Of PC Master race]

snip

Personally I don't mind, because something like this will happen. Eventually.

However, I stand by my point that people will ruin the discussion in max - say, a month or so.

After that there will be discussion about some other people's lives and how to forcibly end them. And it shall face inevitable breakdown of the faction(in to smaller groups). This is the point where all those "movement" gives the bad name to the whoever calls/called themselves the part of the movement. Personally, I think bad outweighs the good by two or three times(as I struggle to find any good it has done). Still living example of such happening is feminism, ironically. If you look at their core ideals, you will never know why some people hate them.


So let's stop beating around the bushes and go to the point.
What exactly stops this movement from going... "Toxic"?
Nothing really does. There is nothing preventing this from becoming next GG(or feminism, if that is more of your taste). You are expecting the goodwill from ALL OF internet forumers. Statistically speaking, that is highly improbable.

But no matter what I do say it will happen again, if not by you then some other person.
[quote =""] Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
-some Swiss patent office worker[/quote]
Truly depressing.

I did talk about all the goods it did, but I personally believe that more changes in the real world came from the so-called extremists. I personally respect them for actually doing something for what they believe what is right, it's probably me though. At least they bring actual (negative) changes to the world.(also ironic. even humorous.)

Spoiler

Picture may or may not be irrelevant.

Oh, as for the poll, no. I go against it not because I don't like your ideals, but because what your ideals will bring.


Edit: Now I know how to post image, edited words and grammars, and opinions.

 

[Artemisalpha]

Trouble is, they're not doing it very well, because there is no concerted effort going on to address the real ethical problems of videogame journalism (everyone's already forgotten the Shadow of Mordor thing, the people who people are abandoning print websites in favour of due to their so called "authentic" voice are actually completely for sale unless they've got the market cloud of TotalBiscuit), the only concerted efforts are to suppress any feminist critique of games or the "gamer" identity based on an imagined persecution complex, and the tactics they're using to do so are going to bite them in the arse the next time a publication pumps the review score because the advertisers got on the phone, GamerGate is likely to create a world where advertisers have unprecedented control over the editorial because that's what "gamers" have shown they want. Remember, the next time a mediocre game gets a good review whilst the site was advertising it, you made that happen GamerGate, you established that power relationship between advertiser and editor.

You act as if campaigns to get advertisers to drop from a publication is something that has not happened before, and that when it has happened in the past, it's lead to advertisers having undue power over a publication. That simply hasn't been the case.

You are correct, though, in that there is no 'concerted effort' - I'd say that there's no concerted effort in any direction with gamergate. The weakness of a movement like gamergate is that it approaches a stand alone complex. There are some of us who would be satisfied with gaming journalists adopting an ethical standard like the SPJ Code of Ethics. There are others who object to a social justice bias, and seek a different standard. There are still others who are trolls, seeking to get their fun by sending threats, and seeing the hornets nest get stirred. And all can claim to be gamergate by simply including a hashtag in their tweets.

 

[grassgremlin]

Snip

Such a doom and gloom scenario. But I'm all ears on what you think should be done.
Honestly, some of us just can't stay quiet so I'm not sure if giving up is a option.

 

[ALIENwolve]

A better phrasing of objective reviewing? Fair reviewing. Taking personal bias into account, explaining how that bias is expressing itself, and attempting to predict who would like X without that bias.

Total Biscuit has issues with Heavy Bullets. He doesn't like how there's only one gun, but he points out that's a personal preference and speculates on who might be looking for that sort of thing.

 

[Pirate Of PC Master race]

Snip

Such a doom and gloom scenario. But I'm all ears on what you think should be done.
Honestly, some of us just can't stay quiet so I'm not sure if giving up is a option.

I'd rather prefer "realistic" rather than "doom and gloom" but that works too.
I'd like to be an optimist too if reality didn't try to crush with its might. Knowing history and how it tend to repeat itself, I am not so sure. I think Jesus would think twice about being crucified if he knew what will be done under his name in next two millennia.

I think what we do need is a spiritual and public leader of the movement, the spearhead of the movement. The one who can actually lead people to do as what his/her ideal represents, and excommunicate or condemn extremists. Of course, his/her will be crucified with death threats and invasion of privacy, but that is the price of the movement.

Of course, expecting a leader in this anonymous environment would be a real fantasy(possibly even delusional).

 

[Davroth]

I think what we do need is a spiritual and public leader of the movement, the spearhead of the movement. The one who can actually lead people to do as what his/her ideal represents, and excommunicate or condemn extremists. Of course, his/her will be crucified with death threats and invasion of privacy, but that is the price of the movement.

Also make absolutely sure there is nothing in his closet that could be seen as skeletons. If you build a group around a leader, and that leader falls victim to character assassination, the whole thing falls apart like a house of cards.

 

[grassgremlin]

Snip

Such a doom and gloom scenario. But I'm all ears on what you think should be done.
Honestly, some of us just can't stay quiet so I'm not sure if giving up is a option.

I'd rather prefer "realistic" rather than "doom and gloom" but that works too.
I'd like to be an optimist too if reality didn't try to crush with its might. Knowing history and how it tend to repeat itself, I am not so sure. I think Jesus would think twice about being crucified if he knew what will be done under his name in next two millennia.

I think what we do need is a spiritual and public leader of the movement, the spearhead of the movement. The one who can actually lead people to do as what his/her ideal represents, and excommunicate or condemn extremists. Of course, his/her will be crucified with death threats and invasion of privacy, but that is the price of the movement.

Of course, expecting a leader in this anonymous environment would be a real fantasy(possibly even delusional).

Yeah, I do agree. I started this, but to be real with you, I am too chicken shit to be a spokesperson or a leader. My people skills are much to be desired. I'm good at working and planning things out.

 

[grassgremlin]

I think what we do need is a spiritual and public leader of the movement, the spearhead of the movement. The one who can actually lead people to do as what his/her ideal represents, and excommunicate or condemn extremists. Of course, his/her will be crucified with death threats and invasion of privacy, but that is the price of the movement.

Also make absolutely sure there is nothing in his closet that could be seen as skeletons. If you build a group around a leader, and that leader falls victim to character assassination, the whole thing falls apart like a house of cards.

I agree. No individuals with seedy or questionable motives in there past.
Screen these guys. Even a random tweet where he accidently fumbled the phrase "I hate black people" could kill this quick.